Hi, On 12-04-2025 12:35, Simon McVittie wrote:
While that specific bug did eventually get fixed, it seems concerning that it had to be maintainers of affected packages who raised the alarm about this, rather than the porting team noticing that there was a more general problem. It also seems concerning that #1093200 was eventually fixed by a maintainer of a different affected package rather than by the mips64el porting team - it doesn't seem healthy for ports to be kept alive by individual heroics from someone who doesn't even have the relevant hardware.
Indeed. The lack of response to several queries and in particular to our final warning [1] has made us decide that mips64el will not be an official trixie architecture. This has just been announced on d-d-a [2].
Paul [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1100544#89[2] https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/E1uGZLq-00149a-1V@respighi.debian.org
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature